Internet DRAFT - draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label
draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label
Idr Working Group Q. Liang
Internet-Draft S. Hares
Intended status: Standards Track J. You
Expires: September 22, 2016 Huawei
R. Raszuk
Nozomi
D. Ma
Cisco Systems
March 21, 2016
Carrying Label Information for BGP FlowSpec
draft-liang-idr-bgp-flowspec-label-02
Abstract
This document specifies a method in which the label mapping
information for a particular FlowSpec rule is piggybacked in the same
Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Update message that is used to
distribute the FlowSpec rule. Based on the proposed method, the
Label Switching Routers (LSRs) (except the ingress LSR) on the Label
Switched Path (LSP) can use label to indentify the traffic matching a
particular FlowSpec rule; this facilitates monitoring and traffic
statistics for FlowSpec rules.
Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 22, 2016.
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. MPLS Flow Specification Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Overview of Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
This section provides the background for proposing a new action for
BGP Flow specification that push/pops MPLS or swaps MPLS tags. For
those familiar with BGP Flow specification ([RFC5575], [RFC7674],
[I-D.ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6], [I-D.ietf-idr-flowspec-l2vpn],
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-flowspec-oid] and MPLS ([RFC3107]) can skip this
background section.
1.1. Background
[RFC5575] defines the flow specification (FlowSpec) that is an
n-tuple consisting of several matching criteria that can be applied
to IP traffic. The matching criteria can include elements such as
source and destination address prefixes, IP protocol, and transport
protocol port numbers. A given IP packet is said to match the
defined flow if it matches all the specified criteria. [RFC5575]
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
also defines a set of filtering actions, such as rate limit,
redirect, marking, associated with each flow specification. A new
Border Gateway Protocol Network Layer Reachability Information (BGP
NLRI) (AFI/SAFI: 1/133 for IPv4, AFI/SAFI: 1/134 for VPNv4) encoding
format is used to distribute traffic flow specifications.
[RFC3107] specifies the way in which the label mapping information
for a particular route is piggybacked in the same Border Gateway
Protocol Update message that is used to distribute the route itself.
Label mapping information is carried as part of the Network Layer
Reachability Information (NLRI) in the Multiprotocol Extensions
attributes. The Network Layer Reachability Information is encoded as
one or more triples of the form <length, label, prefix>. The NLRI
contains a label is indicated by using Subsequent Address Family
Identifier (SAFI) value 4.
[RFC4364] describes a method in which each route within a Virtual
Private Network (VPN) is assigned a Multiprotocol Label Switching
(MPLS) label. If the Address Family Identifier (AFI) field is set to
1, and the SAFI field is set to 128, the NLRI is an MPLS-labeled VPN-
IPv4 address.
1.2. MPLS Flow Specification Deployment
In BGP VPN/MPLS networks when flow specification policy rules exist
on multiple forwarding devices in the network bound with labels from
one or more LSPs, only the ingress LSR (Label Switching Router) needs
to identify a particular traffic flow based on the matching criteria
for flow. Once the flow is match by the ingress LSR, the ingress LSR
steers the packet to a corresponding LSP (Label Switched Path).
Other LSRs of the LSP just need to forward the packet according to
the label carried in it.
2. Terminology
This section contains definitions of terms used in this document.
Flow Specification (FlowSpec): A flow specification is an n-tuple
consisting of several matching criteria that can be applied to IP
traffic, including filters and actions. Each FlowSpec consists of
a set of filters and a set of actions.
3. Overview of Proposal
This document proposes adding a BGP-FS action in an extended
community alters the label switch path associated with a matched
flow. If the match does not have a label switch path, this action is
skipped.
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
The BGP flow specification (BGP-FS) policy rule could match on the
destination prefix and then utilize a BGP-FS action to adjust the
label path associated with it (push/pop/swap tags.) Or a BGP-FS
policy rule could match on any set of BGP-FS match conditions
associated with a BGP-FS action that adjust the label switch path
(push/pop/swap).
[I-D.yong-idr-flowspec-mpls-match] provides a match BGP-FS that may
be used with this action to match and direct MPLS packets.
Example of Use:
Forwarding information for the traffic from IP1 to IP2 in the
Routers:
PE1: in(<IP2,IP1>) --> out(Label2)
ASBR1: in(Label2) --> out(Label3)
ASBR2: in(Label3) --> out(Label4)
PE2: in(Label4) --> out(--)
Labels allocated by flow policy process:
Label4 allocated by PE2
Label3 allocated by ASBR2
Label2 allocated by ASBR1
|<------AS1----->| |<------AS2----->|
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
VPN 1,IP1..| PE1 |====|ASBR1|----|ASBR2|====| PE2 |..VPN1,IP2
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
| LDP LSP1 | | LDP LSP2 |
| -------> | | -------> |
|-------BGP VPN Flowspec LSP---->|
(Label1) (Label2) (Label3) (Label4)
Figure 1: Usage of FlowSpec with Label
BGP-FS rule1 (locally configured):
Filters:
destination ip prefix:IP2/32
source ip prefix:IP1/32
Actions: Extended Communities
traffic-marking: 1
MPLS POP
Note:
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
The following Extended Communities are added/deleted
[rule-1a] BGP-FS action MPLS POP [used on PE2]
[rule-1b] BGP-FS action SWAP 4 [used on ASBR-2]
[rule-1c] BGP-FS action SWAP 3 [used on ASBR-1]
[rule-1d] BGP-FS action push 2 [used on PE1]
PE-2 Changes BGP-FS rule-1a to rule-1b prior to sending
Clears Extended Community: BGP-FS action MPLS POP
Adds Extended Community: BGP-FS action MPLS SWAP 4
ASBR-2 receives BGP-FS rule-1b (NRLI + 2 Extended Community)
Installs the BGP-FS rule-1b (MPLS SWAP 4, traffic-marking)
Changes BGP-FS rule-1b to rule-1c prior to sending to ASBR1
Clear Extended Community: BGP-FS action MPLS SWAP 4
Adds Extended Community: BGP-FS action MPLS SWAP 3
ASBR-1 Receives BGP-FS rule-1c (NLRI + 2 Extended Community)
Installs the BGP-FS rule-1c (MPLS SWAP 3, traffic-marking
Changes BGP-FS rule-1c to rule-1d prior to sending to PE-2
Clear Extended Community: BGP-FS action MPLS SWAP 3
Adds Extended Community: BGP-FS action MPLS SWAP 2
PE-1 Receives BGP-FS rule-1d (NLRI + 2 Extended Communities)
Installs BGP-FS rule-1d action [MPLS SWAP 2, traffic-marking]
4. Protocol Extensions
In this document, BGP is used to distribute the FlowSpec rule bound
with label(s). A new label-action is defined as BGP extended
community value based on Section 7 of [RFC5575].
+--------+--------------------+--------------------------+
| type | extended community | encoding |
+--------+--------------------+--------------------------+
| TBD1 | label-action | MPLS tag |
+--------+--------------------+--------------------------+
Label-action is described below:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type (TBD1 | OpCode|Reserve| order |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Label
| Label | Exp |S| TTL | Stack
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Entry
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
The use and the meaning of these fields are as follows:
Type: the same as defined in [RFC4360]
OpCode: Operation code
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
|OpCode| Function |
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | Push the MPLS tag |
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | Pop the outermost MPLS tag in the packet |
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | Swap the MPLS tag with the outermost MPLS tag in the packet|
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
| 3~15 | Reserved |
+------+------------------------------------------------------------+
When the Opcode field is set to 0, the label stack entry Should
be pushed on the MPLS label stack.
When the OpCode field is set to 1, the label stack entry is
invalid, and the router SHOULD pop the existing outermost MPLS
tag in the packet.
When the OpCode field is set to 2, the router SHOULD swap the
label stack entry with the existing outermost MPLS tag in the
packet. If the packet has no MPLS tag, it just pushes the
label stack entry.
The OpCode 0 or 1 may be used in some SDN networks, such as the
scenario described in
[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-central-epe].
The OpCode 2 can be used in traditional BGP MPLS/VPN networks.
Reserved: all zeros.
Order: A FlowSpec rule MAY include one or more ordering label-
action(s). If multiple label action extended communities are
associated with a BGP-FS Rule, this gives the order of this in the
list. The Last action received for an order will be used.
Label: the same as defined in [RFC3032].
Bottom of Stack (S): the same as defined in [RFC3032]. It SHOULD
be invalid, and set to zero by default. It MAY be modified by the
forwarding router locally.
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
Time to Live (TTL): the same as defined in[RFC3032]. It MAY be
modified by the forwarding router locally.
Experimental Use (Exp): the same as defined in [RFC3032]. It MAY
be modified by the forwarding router according to the local
routing policy.
5. IANA Considerations
For the purpose of this work, IANA should allocate the following
Extended community:
TBD1 for label-action
6. Security considerations
This extension to BGP does not change the underlying security issues
inherent in the existing BGP.
7. Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank Shunwan Zhuang, Zhenbin Li, Peng Zhou
and Jeff Haas for their comments.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3032] Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y.,
Farinacci, D., Li, T., and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack
Encoding", RFC 3032, DOI 10.17487/RFC3032, January 2001,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3032>.
[RFC3107] Rekhter, Y. and E. Rosen, "Carrying Label Information in
BGP-4", RFC 3107, DOI 10.17487/RFC3107, May 2001,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3107>.
[RFC4360] Sangli, S., Tappan, D., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP Extended
Communities Attribute", RFC 4360, DOI 10.17487/RFC4360,
February 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4360>.
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[RFC5575] Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J.,
and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification
Rules", RFC 5575, DOI 10.17487/RFC5575, August 2009,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5575>.
[RFC7674] Haas, J., Ed., "Clarification of the Flowspec Redirect
Extended Community", RFC 7674, DOI 10.17487/RFC7674,
October 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7674>.
8.2. Informative References
[I-D.filsfils-spring-segment-routing-central-epe]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Patel, K., Shaw, S., Ginsburg,
D., and D. Afanasiev, "Segment Routing Centralized Egress
Peer Engineering", draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-
central-epe-05 (work in progress), August 2015.
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-flowspec-oid]
Uttaro, J., Filsfils, C., Smith, D., Alcaide, J., and P.
Mohapatra, "Revised Validation Procedure for BGP Flow
Specifications", draft-ietf-idr-bgp-flowspec-oid-02 (work
in progress), January 2014.
[I-D.ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6]
McPherson, D., Raszuk, R., Pithawala, B., Andy, A., and S.
Hares, "Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules for
IPv6", draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-07 (work in progress),
March 2016.
[I-D.ietf-idr-flowspec-l2vpn]
Weiguo, H., Litkowski, S., and S. Zhuang, "Dissemination
of Flow Specification Rules for L2 VPN", draft-ietf-idr-
flowspec-l2vpn-03 (work in progress), November 2015.
[I-D.yong-idr-flowspec-mpls-match]
Yong , L., Liang , Q., and J. You , "Dissemination of Flow
Specification Rules for MPLS Label", March 2016.
Authors' Addresses
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft BGP FlowSpec March 2016
Qiandeng Liang
Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District
Nanjing, 210012
China
Email: liangqiandeng@huawei.com
Susan Hares
Huawei
7453 Hickory Hill
Saline, MI 48176
USA
Email: shares@ndzh.com
Jianjie You
Huawei
101 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District
Nanjing, 210012
China
Email: youjianjie@huawei.com
Robert Raszuk
Nozomi
Email: robert@raszuk.net
Dan Ma
Cisco Systems
Email: danma@cisco.com
Liang, et al. Expires September 22, 2016 [Page 9]
